Author Topic: Van Allen on Space Radiation.  (Read 53740 times)

Offline Luke Pemberton

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1823
  • Chaos in his tin foil hat
Re: Van Allen on Space Radiation.
« Reply #45 on: July 07, 2016, 03:07:25 PM »
Ok if this is the H-alpha data, where in the data would I find the shock driven CM's?

You don't, there's nothing in the data to point to SPE events as the data does not describe proton data, it describes the prominence of the H-alpha line and radio wave characteristics during a solar flare (a localised event). Entrance stage left - Jay and the great IMDb debate.

There is research that correlates the significance of H-alpha with an SPE, and shows that a greater H-alpha prominence means a higher probability of an SPE.  However, an SPE is no indicative of a shock driven halo-CME. SPE is simply a definition that relates to a higher proton flux. In other words, not all SPEs are halo-CMEs. In fact some SPEs are quite minor, and simply weather.

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former - Albert Einstein.

I can calculate the motion of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people – Sir Isaac Newton.

A polar orbit would also bypass the SAA - Tim Finch

Offline Luke Pemberton

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1823
  • Chaos in his tin foil hat
Re: Van Allen on Space Radiation.
« Reply #46 on: July 07, 2016, 03:10:00 PM »
It's hard to fathom the energies involved here, especially when you consider that the "surface" gravity on the sun is 28 g!

Which I always think is quite small for something that size. Why do numbers in physics just never seem to add up to expectations?
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former - Albert Einstein.

I can calculate the motion of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people – Sir Isaac Newton.

A polar orbit would also bypass the SAA - Tim Finch

Offline bknight

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Van Allen on Space Radiation.
« Reply #47 on: July 07, 2016, 03:33:17 PM »
Ok if this is the H-alpha data, where in the data would I find the shock driven CM's?

You don't, there's nothing in the data to point to SPE events as the data does not describe proton data, it describes the prominence of the H-alpha line and radio wave characteristics during a solar flare (a localised event). Entrance stage left - Jay and the great IMDb debate.

There is research that correlates the significance of H-alpha with an SPE, and shows that a greater H-alpha prominence means a higher probability of an SPE.  However, an SPE is no indicative of a shock driven halo-CME. SPE is simply a definition that relates to a higher proton flux. In other words, not all SPEs are halo-CMEs. In fact some SPEs are quite minor, and simply weather.
OK, I re-read the whole tread after posting, and you indicated that no space pre 1976 data was recorded, so the Aug 1972 event was measured here on Earth somewhere.  I think the last two sentences sum up an answer to my initial intent.
Truth needs no defense.  Nobody can take those footsteps I made on the surface of the moon away from me.
Eugene Cernan

Offline raven

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1651
Re: Van Allen on Space Radiation.
« Reply #48 on: July 07, 2016, 04:56:07 PM »
It's hard to fathom the energies involved here, especially when you consider that the "surface" gravity on the sun is 28 g!

Which I always think is quite small for something that size. Why do numbers in physics just never seem to add up to expectations?
Well, it's size or, rather, density, has something to do with it. Saturn's "surface" gravity is only 0.633 m/s² more than Earth's despite having 95 times the mass.

Offline Luke Pemberton

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1823
  • Chaos in his tin foil hat
Re: Van Allen on Space Radiation.
« Reply #49 on: July 07, 2016, 08:31:06 PM »
It's hard to fathom the energies involved here, especially when you consider that the "surface" gravity on the sun is 28 g!

Which I always think is quite small for something that size. Why do numbers in physics just never seem to add up to expectations?
Well, it's size or, rather, density, has something to do with it. Saturn's "surface" gravity is only 0.633 m/s² more than Earth's despite having 95 times the mass.

I understand how to calculate g :). It's the dependence of g with mass and radius. Physics is sometimes counterintuitive, Saturn is another good example.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former - Albert Einstein.

I can calculate the motion of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people – Sir Isaac Newton.

A polar orbit would also bypass the SAA - Tim Finch

Offline Glom

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1102
Re: Van Allen on Space Radiation.
« Reply #50 on: July 08, 2016, 03:22:43 AM »
Saturn will also float in the sea.

Offline bknight

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Van Allen on Space Radiation.
« Reply #51 on: July 08, 2016, 09:01:29 AM »
Saturn will also float in the sea.

Very big and deep sea!
Truth needs no defense.  Nobody can take those footsteps I made on the surface of the moon away from me.
Eugene Cernan

Offline Luke Pemberton

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1823
  • Chaos in his tin foil hat
Re: Van Allen on Space Radiation.
« Reply #52 on: July 08, 2016, 12:32:22 PM »
Saturn will also float in the sea.

Great fact.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former - Albert Einstein.

I can calculate the motion of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people – Sir Isaac Newton.

A polar orbit would also bypass the SAA - Tim Finch

Offline nomuse

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 859
Re: Van Allen on Space Radiation.
« Reply #53 on: July 08, 2016, 08:21:31 PM »
Don't use the bathtub, tho ....it will leave a ring.

Offline bknight

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Van Allen on Space Radiation.
« Reply #54 on: July 09, 2016, 11:02:12 AM »
Don't use the bathtub, tho ....it will leave a ring.

Very cute. :)
Truth needs no defense.  Nobody can take those footsteps I made on the surface of the moon away from me.
Eugene Cernan

Offline raven

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1651
Re: Van Allen on Space Radiation.
« Reply #55 on: July 09, 2016, 10:22:04 PM »
The real question is, what would Uranus leave?

Offline BazBear

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 396
Re: Van Allen on Space Radiation.
« Reply #56 on: July 10, 2016, 10:49:33 PM »
Saturn will also float in the sea.

Very big and deep sea!
A sea that big would have so much gravity that Saturn would be doooooomed! :o
"It's true you know. In space, no one can hear you scream like a little girl." - Mark Watney, protagonist of The Martian by Andy Weir

Offline Count Zero

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 380
  • Pad 39A July 14,1969
Re: Van Allen on Space Radiation.
« Reply #57 on: July 11, 2016, 06:37:53 AM »
You could do it on Ringworld.  ;)
"What makes one step a giant leap is all the steps before."

Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3014
Re: Van Allen on Space Radiation.
« Reply #58 on: July 11, 2016, 05:47:56 PM »
The interesting thing about planetary gravities in the solar system is how there are only two discrete values, plus Jupiter as an outlier.

Venus, Earth, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune are all about 1g, +/- 15% or so. Mars and Mercury are around 1/3 g. Jupiter is the outlier at 2.5g.

Offline nomuse

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 859
Re: Van Allen on Space Radiation.
« Reply #59 on: July 11, 2016, 09:15:25 PM »
Erm, yeah, but how arbitrary is that "surface" definition for the gas giants? Do any of them have a distinct edge  or is it more the zone where the average of material in one particular phase is larger (by mass? by volume?) than the other?